Without freedom of religion people would be subjected to abuse depending on their religion and the area they live in. Abuse could range from physical to simply they can not worship what they believe. For example take 9/11, without freedom of religion these people easily could have been persecuted just for being muslim, even though terrorists doesn't equal muslims in America.
Lyng v. Northwest Indian CPA (1988) The United States Forest Service wished to build a paved road that would go through the Chimney Rock area of the Six Rivers National Forest. After completing a study that stated that it would damage land that had historically been used by Native Americans to conduct religious rituals, they planned to continue constructing the paved road. The Northwest Indian Cemetery Protective Association then took legal action. The Supreme Court decided, 5-3, that the Forest Service was free to harvest the lands. Even though it would be destroying Indian religious land, that effect was incidental; it wasn’t as if the Forest Service was forcing the Native Americans to act in violation of their beliefs. The Court also said that the government could not operate “if it were required to satisfy every citizen’s religious needs and desires”, and that the First Amendment did not give any one group veto power over public programs that did not actually prohibit the free exercise of religion.
US v. Ballard (1944) Guy Ballard believed that the words of St. Germain, the divine messenger, were transmitted through him. Ballard also claimed that he has, and has in the past, healed people. He offered his healing abilities in exchange for money sent to him through the mail. He was charged for fraud, as the government said that Ballard knew what he was claiming was false. The jury was told not to consider his religious beliefs. The Supreme Court said that beliefs could not be an issue because they could either be judged correct or incorrect. Heresy is an offense because of the First Amendment, so all that mattered was whether Ballard believed he had the powers he was claiming. Therefore, juries can’t consider whether or not a person’s religious beliefs are true. As long as the person accepts them in good faith, the state cannot determine if it is logical.
Current Case..... ?
Direction of project: Our main idea would be to actually take the idea of 9/11 and focus in on how freedom of religion actually protected the people in America from abuse. Without freedom, America would have had the power to round up anyone who was muslim or any religion primarily from the Middle East and put them in concentration camps without any reasoning besides they worshipped differently. So overall this freedom was able to protect muslims, mosques, and an overall life style and religion from being hurt by the government and other Americans.
So this would require two scenes where one we depict what really happened and how people were protected and scene two would be what could have happened without freedom of religion.
Period 2 Spring 2011
Without freedom of religion people would be subjected to abuse depending on their religion and the area they live in. Abuse could range from physical to simply they can not worship what they believe. For example take 9/11, without freedom of religion these people easily could have been persecuted just for being muslim, even though terrorists doesn't equal muslims in America.
Lyng v. Northwest Indian CPA (1988)
The United States Forest Service wished to build a paved road that would go through the Chimney Rock area of the Six Rivers National Forest. After completing a study that stated that it would damage land that had historically been used by Native Americans to conduct religious rituals, they planned to continue constructing the paved road. The Northwest Indian Cemetery Protective Association then took legal action.
The Supreme Court decided, 5-3, that the Forest Service was free to harvest the lands. Even though it would be destroying Indian religious land, that effect was incidental; it wasn’t as if the Forest Service was forcing the Native Americans to act in violation of their beliefs. The Court also said that the government could not operate “if it were required to satisfy every citizen’s religious needs and desires”, and that the First Amendment did not give any one group veto power over public programs that did not actually prohibit the free exercise of religion.
US v. Ballard (1944)
Guy Ballard believed that the words of St. Germain, the divine messenger, were transmitted through him. Ballard also claimed that he has, and has in the past, healed people. He offered his healing abilities in exchange for money sent to him through the mail. He was charged for fraud, as the government said that Ballard knew what he was claiming was false. The jury was told not to consider his religious beliefs.
The Supreme Court said that beliefs could not be an issue because they could either be judged correct or incorrect. Heresy is an offense because of the First Amendment, so all that mattered was whether Ballard believed he had the powers he was claiming. Therefore, juries can’t consider whether or not a person’s religious beliefs are true. As long as the person accepts them in good faith, the state cannot determine if it is logical.
Current Case..... ?
Direction of project: Our main idea would be to actually take the idea of 9/11 and focus in on how freedom of religion actually protected the people in America from abuse. Without freedom, America would have had the power to round up anyone who was muslim or any religion primarily from the Middle East and put them in concentration camps without any reasoning besides they worshipped differently. So overall this freedom was able to protect muslims, mosques, and an overall life style and religion from being hurt by the government and other Americans.
So this would require two scenes where one we depict what really happened and how people were protected and scene two would be what could have happened without freedom of religion.
Period 2 Spring 2011 Script Draft One